Talk:Citadel: The Fourth Estate
If you people want to make all hell's break loose, choose to answer the last question (the one about Saren) that he was responsable for attacking Eden Prime or saying that the Council was protecting him. Admiral Hacket will be very piss off! :D LOL * all he does is get slightly upset and say it was "politicly inconvenient", or something Mako Pro 06:46, December 23, 2009 (UTC) Choices in Conversation After looking through this article and what's mentioned in the Morality Guide, I was left wondering exactly what each result was and what the consequences for each were, given the large variety in this rather unique rapid-fire sequence ...so I spent a couple hours figuring it out, and I'm posting my results here for the sake of anyone else who might be curious, along with possibly improving the related articles. Introduction: Care to Answer some Questions? A two-part dialogue, that can either be immediately accepted (first - top-right), eventually accepted (first - mid-right / bottom-right, second top-right / mid-right), or eventually refused (first mid-right / bottom-right, second bottom-right). Assuming the conversation continues, choices made here appear to have no consequence later-on, though shutting her down will swiftly 'complete' the assignment to no one's benefit. Opening Volley: Human Spectre & Loyalties Another two-part dialogue, each being specific questions with relatively simple positive, neutral, and negative responses, with the second positive/negative being replaced with Charm/Intimidate options. However, neither of these answers appear to have any consequence later-on, including any effect on morality count. Rapid-fire: Normandy, Authority, & Respect This series of questions each have 5 possible answers, 2 of which remain the same and are a means of abandoning the interview; either by walking away (top-right), or punching the 'journalist' (bottom-right). Similar to the opening refusal, this 'completes' the assignment with a differing debrief from Adm. Hackett afterwards, though includes a reduced reward and a small bonus of +2 morality points. This also pointedly renders one's performance through-out the interview indeterminate, as the act itself seems to overshadow any answers previously given. Alternatively, one may attempt to continue with the interview, with up-to 3 challenging questions, each with a different Charm (top-left), Intimidate (bottom-left), and Neutral (mid-right) responses available. Regarding the third question, it will only be asked if the player chooses to answer the second question with a Neutral response. Either way, in order to have a chance to score a moderate bonus of morality points with Hackett later-on, the player must choose at least 2 of the same challenges; Charm-Charm / Charm-Neutral-Charm or Intimidate-Intimidate / Intimidate-Neutral-Intimidate. However, there won't be any morality bonus if the player falls short, either from a mix (ex: Charm - Neutral - Intimidate), which Hackett will consider a limited success, or if too many Neutral responses are given, Hackett will consider it unsuccessful. One Last Question: Saren This last question is quite similar to the previous series, in that the 2 quick-exit replies remain, along with the standardized Neutral response, except that the left side is no longer a choice between Charm and Intimidate, but instead 'anger-the-council' options #1 and #2. The quick-exit replies have the same outcome as before, while any of the other three options will successfully complete the assignment. Al-Jilani's Response *Immediate Refusal - "Have it your way"; no reward. *Refusal (walk away) - "Admit you're a Council shill"; ''Reward of 25% credits, 10% XP, +2 Paragon''. *Refusal (punch out) - "Your career is over"; ''Reward of 25% credits, 10% XP, +2 Renegade''. *Complete - answer all questions; ''Reward of 100% credits, 100% XP, possible Hackett reward''. Hackett's Response *Immediate Refusal - no blame for 'blowing her off', people will forget in a week. *Refusal (walk away) - compliments walking away, most would've punched her. *Refusal (punch out) - admits she deserved it, but warns the Alliance brass is unhappy. *<2x morality - didn't come off very well, ran circles around you. *2x morality (different) - You did well, she shouldn't have ambushed you. *2x morality (charm) - You played it well, got a knack for handling the press; ''Reward of +8 Paragon''. *2x morality (intimidate) - I didn't agree, might've damaged relations; ''Reward of +9 Renegade''. :*Bonus (expose Saren; requires later 4) - damaged Council relations; no change in reward. Conclusions While the Morality Guide isn't inaccurate, I found it a bit confusing, not to mention the lack of data on this article (there's a third possible question during the 'rapid-fire'?!?). There's also some grey area that I can't immediately test, like if any of these options damages Udina's disposition towards Shepard, or which / how-many questions are changed by the variable of the first world (the above results are in regards to Therum). Hope all this helps someone... Dsurian (talk) 19:44, May 19, 2019 (UTC)